@@GH-oi2jf - He can't easily do it if he's listening remotely while in the shower like I do (why let time go to waste?), and this lecture comes up next in the queue.
In any case, it was their (the Haunstein Center) event, this is their channel, and they may manage it as they please. I am grateful that they place these talks online for anyone to hear. They do not owe us YT viewers anything.
I am not really sure about the argument you (Bill Brands) made about the removal of statues, so I’m just asking the question: there are no statues of Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin in my country. They have not been erased from history. We remember them. The statues could be put in a museum for purposes of teaching history, not honoring Jefferson etc. What’s your opinion on that.
Can you fairly equate Lee and the confederates with Stalin and Hitler? When we look back at historical figures I don't think it is fair to view them with our modern views. This cancel culture we are developing in this country is very dangerous and weakens our country.
I found Brands’ remarks on the removal of monuments interesting, as I am likewise skeptical about removal. But I would make a distinction. There were two statues of Lee that were in the news because of plans for their removal, in New Orleans and in Charlottesville. The former, in my opinion, was rightly removed. It depicted General Lee in a pose of defiance, scowling towards the North. This was not a historically accurate representation because, despite his commitment to the Confederate cause of preserving slavery, Lee was gracious in defeat. He did not want monuments at all, but he surely would not have approved of this one. His likeness was being exploited to make a political statement. The New Orleans statue was bad history and bad art. It would be fitting to melt it down and use the metal for some nobler purpose. The Charlottesville statue is different. I don’t know the intent, but the sculpture of Lee on horseback with his hat removed appears to me to depict Lee at Appomattox, accepting his defeat with grace. Whatever Lee was thinking at the time, his depiction represents an important historical event without exploiting it for ignoble purposes. I have not seen how the Charlottesville statue is displayed, but I would recommend this: Fly a 35 star flag to denote the preservation of the Union at the end of the war. Display a plaque with some of Lee’s words of reconciliation from the post-war period.
When Prof Brands addresses very recent Presidents, Bush II and Obama, he makes excuses for what was done by them and their administrations with regard to making war, committing aggression, and condoning torture and even the denial of rights dating back to the Magna Carta. Though I enjoyed his discussions on the first 200 years of US history, I am greatly disappointed by his failure to condemn US presidents who, as Noam Chomsky writes, are indictable war criminals by the standards the US employed to try the NAZIs at Nuremberg from 1947-49.
Great presentation. A very talented teacher!!
Thanks for Uploading.
Very interesting presentation about USA history in first half of XIX century.
HW Brands start 15:32
Thanks for editing
Brands starts speaking at 15 minutes and 30 seconds. Jesus Christ won't the uploaders cut out the BS
Brandon Macey - You can do it as easily. Some people want to hear the intro.
@@GH-oi2jf true.. But.. people who want the intro < people who don't
@@GH-oi2jf - He can't easily do it if he's listening remotely while in the shower like I do (why let time go to waste?), and this lecture comes up next in the queue.
@@willardchi2571facts
In any case, it was their (the Haunstein Center) event, this is their channel, and they may manage it as they please. I am grateful that they place these talks online for anyone to hear. They do not owe us YT viewers anything.
I am not really sure about the argument you (Bill Brands) made about the removal of statues, so I’m just asking the question: there are no statues of Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin in my country. They have not been erased from history. We remember them. The statues could be put in a museum for purposes of teaching history, not honoring Jefferson etc. What’s your opinion on that.
Can you fairly equate Lee and the confederates with Stalin and Hitler? When we look back at historical figures I don't think it is fair to view them with our modern views. This cancel culture we are developing in this country is very dangerous and weakens our country.
I found Brands’ remarks on the removal of monuments interesting, as I am likewise skeptical about removal. But I would make a distinction. There were two statues of Lee that were in the news because of plans for their removal, in New Orleans and in Charlottesville.
The former, in my opinion, was rightly removed. It depicted General Lee in a pose of defiance, scowling towards the North. This was not a historically accurate representation because, despite his commitment to the Confederate cause of preserving slavery, Lee was gracious in defeat. He did not want monuments at all, but he surely would not have approved of this one. His likeness was being exploited to make a political statement.
The New Orleans statue was bad history and bad art. It would be fitting to melt it down and use the metal for some nobler purpose.
The Charlottesville statue is different. I don’t know the intent, but the sculpture of Lee on horseback with his hat removed appears to me to depict Lee at Appomattox, accepting his defeat with grace. Whatever Lee was thinking at the time, his depiction represents an important historical event without exploiting it for ignoble purposes.
I have not seen how the Charlottesville statue is displayed, but I would recommend this: Fly a 35 star flag to denote the preservation of the Union at the end of the war. Display a plaque with some of Lee’s words of reconciliation from the post-war period.
15:30
Thank you
1:07:00 Prophetic.
When Prof Brands addresses very recent Presidents, Bush II and Obama, he makes excuses for what was done by them and their administrations with regard to making war, committing aggression, and condoning torture and even the denial of rights dating back to the Magna Carta. Though I enjoyed his discussions on the first 200 years of US history, I am greatly disappointed by his failure to condemn US presidents who, as Noam Chomsky writes, are indictable war criminals by the standards the US employed to try the NAZIs at Nuremberg from 1947-49.
Brands, like most professional historians, doesn't take Chomsky's historical writings very seriously.
Perez Anna Perez Matthew White Joseph
i liked him until his opinion on the outcome of the civil war was questionable